1.
Analyse 4:1:67-82 of Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing. Your analysis
should indicate how this excerpt speaks to the larger concerns of the play.

2.
What does the “nothing” in the title of the play refer to? Write an essay in
which you unpack the term in a logical and coherent way. You should take care
to substantiate your argument by citing from the play.

1. 'Nothing'
in the title of the play Much Ado About Nothinq can have three
interpretations, and it is precisely this pun on the word which makes it so
typical of Shakespeare and the diction of his era. Courtiers in the 1500's were
expected to use such cleverly contrived lines, especially with sexual
innuendo's, as often as possible, and to make them sound as uncontrived as
possible. This would give them the appearance of elegance and humour, but with
what Castiglione called 'sprezzatura', the illusion of effortlessness
(Sparknotes, 1999). This is reflected in the title, Much Ado About Nothing,
which sounds rather off-hand, as if a light comedy is about to follow. This is
Shakespeare's ingenious way of appealing to the 'common' audience at his plays,
where bawdy jokes and jibes at the fanciful language of courtiers would be well
received:

BENEDICK ... his words are a very fantastical banquet, just so
many strange dishes. (2:iii:15-16)

At the same
time, Shakespeare is broaching the more serious topics of women's role in
society, and deception, to his more learned audience. In this essay, I plan to
explain how he does this by unpacking the different interpretations of the word
'nothing' in the title. I also plan to explain their different meanings using
quotations from the play to justify my arguments.

In
Shakespearean times, the word 'nothing' in the title would have been pronounced
as 'noting', and it is from this that perhaps the most important interpretation
of the word arises, since the plot of the play is based almost entirely on
'notings': both visual and auditory. We fist come across this when Claudio says
".. .didst thou note the daughter of Signor Leonato?" (1:i:114) Here,
Claudio means 'notice' and is simply asking Benedick if he saw Hero. This
simple 'noting' of people and events happens, as with life, continually,
throughout the play. It is, however, when these notings are manipulated, either
accidentally or through deceit, for either good or bad ends, that the intricate
plot of the play is woven.

In Act 1
Scene ii, a servant of Antonio's overhears and accidentally 'mis-notes' Claudio
and Don Pedro's conversation about Hero, and tells Antonio that the Prince woos
Hero for himself. This accident has neither good nor bad consequences, but
serves to show how easily things can be misinterpreted, and leads us into the
following deceptions. Indeed, Leonato is even cautious enough to ask his
brother if his servant is reliable: "Hath the fellow any wit that told you
this?" (1:I:13) Claudio, however, is far more trusting of his informants
and quick to mis-note things. He sees the Prince talking to Hero on his behalf,
but Don John manipulates him into believing the Prince woos for himself.
Claudio ironically says: "Let every eye negotiate for itself/And trust no
agent," (2:I:133-4) but he has already mis-noted the situation by trusting
Don John, and is only convinced otherwise when Don Pedro gives Hero to him.

A much more
light-hearted deception and mis-noting takes place when Don Pedro, Leonato and
Claudio trick Benedick into believing Beatrice is in love with him, and Hero
and Ursula do the same to Beatrice. In both examples, Benedick and Beatrice
'note' what is being said by eavesdropping on their deceivers, and believe
every word to be true though there has been no prior evidence to suggest it.
Both of them want to be loved by the other, so they willingly fall for the
false 'notes' dropped for them: "Bait the hook well; this fish will
bite," (2:iii:96) and ".. .the false sweet bait that we lay. (3:i:33)
This 'sweet bait' is purposefully set for both the good of Beatrice and
Benedick, and the entertainment of their friends.

In the very
next scene however, Don Pedro and Claudio fall victim to a very different type
of deception. Don John is manipulating their perception to their detriment when
he stages the amorous encounter between Borachio and 'Hero' (actually
Margaret). He deliberately mis-represents events to them, and though he says
"If you dare not trust that you see, confess not that you know,"
(3:ii:84) he knows that they will both note the situation incorrectly, through
his eyes.

The
inadequacy of noting things simply with one’s eyes and ears, and ignoring one’s
personal experience, comes across strongly in the play. The characters all seem
so ready to mis-note things, against their better judgement (Chidester, 1995).
At the wedding, Claudio is convinced of Hero's infidelity and notes every sign
on her as a sign of proof: "Her blush is guiltiness, not modesty."
(4:i:37) He asks "Are our eyes our own?" (4:i:66) expecting the
answer to be obviously yes, but it is not so: Don John has successfully made
them not see things through his eyes. It is only the Friar who has better
judgement and knows it is wiser to trust in own experience and instinct,

By noting of the lady...

...trust not my age

My reverence, calling, nor divinity,

If this sweet lady lie not guiltless here

Under some biting error. (4:i:153-165)

He also uses
deception for good when he lets the Prince and Claudio 'note' Hero's fainting
as her death, so that she may live again later, untainted by this scandal.

Hero's
scandal brings us to the second interpretation of the word 'nothing' in the
title. For Shakespeare's contemporaries, 'nothing' was a condescending term for
the female genitalia, thus the title would present to us a play where 'much
ado' occurs over women. This is clearly shown in the aforementioned wedding
scene, where everyone makes much fuss over Hero's apparent infidelity. Claudio
feels cheated, angry and extremely embarrassed. Leonato is disgraced, as his
daughter's loss of honour would permanently damage his name and social
standing. He shows this almost to the point of conceit when he says, “Hath no
man's dagger here a point for me?" (4:i:72) where he would rather die then
live with his shame.

Hero's life,
after this disastrous public humiliation, is utterly ruined, and everyone
present knows it. Beatrice even asks Benedick to fight Claudio on behalf of
Hero; dueling being a thing men often did over women in those days. In fact,
'much ado' was often made over women, the objects of men's sexual and social
desire. Even Benedick attempts a love sonnet for his woman, and risks
humiliation over quitting bachelorhood and marrying her.

Yet without
these female 'nothings' and the constant mis-notings in the play, there would
be no play, and the third interpretation of the 'nothing' in the title is
exactly that: nothing. Behind all the deception and the noting, and all the
uproar over Hero, is nothing at all. The prince did not woo for himself, Hero
was not unfaithful and did not die, and Beatrice and Benedict were not as mad
for each other as claimed. As a 16th century courtier would say with
'sprezzatura', "What an ado over nothing!"

I believe
that Don John speaks more truth then he realises when he says "Note notes,
forsooth, and nothing." (2:iii:49)

2. The word ‘Nothing’ in the
title of Shakespeare’s social comedy Much
Ado About Nothing, has a number of connotations and meanings. These are
based on word-play and on sexual innuendo, pertain to the structure and plot
development of the work itself, and often make reference to Shakespeare’s
personal views on the mindset and conduct of Elizabethan society. I aim to
discuss just a few of these explanations, which serve to suggest the intricate
and sensitive manner with which Shakespeare named his work.

In Elizabethan times, ‘Noting’
and ‘Nothing’ were interchangeable words, and hence the title could be read as
‘Much Ado About Noting’ (Schalkwyk , 2003). In many instances in the play,
characters claim to be noting, observing, or seeing events, qualities and circumstances which do not exist
outside of their individual perceptions. The most obvious example of this, is
Claudio’s erroneous noting of ‘Hero’s infidelity’ on the eve of their wedding
day. Another is Leonato’s perception of his daughter Hero’s character: a father
who should be able to see and know his own daughter and her moral
stature, automatically assumes she is guilty of adultery when the misinformed
Claudio and Don Pedro (whom Leonato holds in higher esteem than his own child),
assert it. Much Ado About Nothing is
about seeing and seeing incorrectly. The characters choose what they want to see or and selectively recognise
certain things as valuable. Additionally, they have been conditioned by society
to understand reality in a certain way and reflect this in their observations.

The pun on nothing-noting is further
marked by Don Pedro’s humourous sparring with the musician Balthasar in Act
2:3: 54-58:

DON PEDRO:Nay, pray
thee, come;

Or if thou wilt hold longer argument,

Do it in notes

BALTHASAR:Note this
before my notes:

There’s not a note of mine that’s worth the noting.

DON PEDRO: Why, these are very crotchets that he speaks.

Note notes, forsooth, and nothing.

Balthasar claims that none of his musical
notes are worth taking notice of, or writing into musical notation. Don Pedro
teasingly reassuring him that his ‘crotchets’ are “both quarter notes and
trivial eccentricities” (Zitner,1994:131-132) and urges him to play on: “Note
notes (music), forsooth, and nothing (else).” This play on words was delightful
for audiences at the time. Musical notation
and songs play an important role in this play. Balthasar’s song‘Sigh No More, Ladies’ has particular
consistency with the themes of the play such as suspicion of the opposite sex,
and the role of women in Elizabethan society.

Over and above musical notation, the
themes of the play are foregrounded through Shakespeare’s use of sexual
euphemism and his emphasis on sexuality. In Elizabethan times, a ‘thing’
signified male genitalia and ‘nothing’ consequently signified female’s (lack
of) genitalia (Zitner, 1994: 14-15). It is not known for sure if Shakespeare intended the title of the play to
contain sexual reference, but it certainly underlies a basic premise of the
play: the obsession with sexual betrayal and the maintenance of male ‘honour’.
The joys of sexuality are highlighted in the plays jokes and puns, but the power
of sexuality - especially that power that women hold over men - is underscored
by the male characters’ fear of disgrace and dishonour through female
infidelity. It is this reason why Benedick seems all too suspicious of women
and why Claudio feels so debased after Hero’s sexual betrayal. This attitude is
also evident in Don Pedro in Act 4:1: 63-65:

DON PEDRO: What should I speak?

I stand dishonoured, that I have
gone about

To link my dear friend to a
common stale.

It is the political nature of controlling
erotic desire that is brought to the fore, and through this play Shakespeare
investigates how personal desires frequently clash with social structures and
how sexual desire often evolves into marriage, or prohibits it.

However, it is a cunning plan of
deception that brings on the marriage of the two feuding personalities of
Beatrice and Benedick. And very craftily, Shakespeare seems to incorporate
Beatrice and Benedick’s ‘noting’ as a plot methodology. In Act 2:3 and Act 3:1 when Beatrice and Benedick are ‘tricked’
into overhearing their friends talk about each one’s love for the other
(Mandel, 2003). Don Pedro, Leonato and Claudio hide in the orchard so Benedick
can ‘note’ their conversation. They drop hints and clues so Benedick can ‘note’
Beatrice’s love for him. (Ironically, the conversation is essentially false,
because it was merely a fictitious construction of Don Pedro, Leonato and
Claudio, yet the content is essentially true - but neither Beatrice nor
Benedick are willing to bring it ‘out in the open’, and both, before ‘noting’
these deceitful conversations, refuse to ‘note’ each one’s love for the other.)
It is possible that the false stories of love that Beatrice and Benedick
overhear, serve to create a mutual
affection between the two, where none existed beforehand. Here the idea of
false noting is not only encouraged and celebrated, but used as a plot device!

Another manner through which Beatrice and
Benedick are trapped into revealing their love for one another is when textual
evidence – in the form of sonnets written in praise of each other – is found in
their pockets. These notes, plus other forms of physical texts, often uncover
the true reality of various false ‘notings’. In Act 4:2:40-41, at the jail,
Dogberry commands the Sexton to note the true events of the night of Hero’s
accused infidelity:

DOGBERRY: Write down Prince John a villain. Why this is flat perjury
to call a princes brother a villain.

It is this written manuscript that
changes the characters’ perception of Don John as noble prince, to that of a
person with a great capacity for evil; and uncovers a perceived infidelity to
be a staged deception. These notes have the power to elucidate an event or a
character’s personality.

Although in this instance
‘nothing’ has a very literal meaning, it can be understood that the title Much Ado About Nothing may refer to more
general ideas in the play. For instance, Shakespeare might have called the play
‘Much Ado About Hero’s Infidelity’ - an act which is falsely accused, therefore
Claudio and Don Pedro get into a state over nothing - or ‘Much Ado About
Bachelorhood’ - a position that Beatrice and Benedick praise to the highest
degree, yet proves unsuitable for them in practice. Maybe the ‘nothing’
Shakespeare was referring to is the insubstantial nature of the declarations of
love - such as those of Claudio and Hero - that proved to be based on whim,
convenience, and sexual attraction, as opposed to trust, compassion and
respect. Maybe it was the dismissal of the idea of preserving male honour, and
the need for men’s desire for control over female sexuality, that Shakespeare
seemed to view with a critical and reproachful eye.

In conclusion, it must be
‘noted’, that the action of the play comes
full circle. The ‘plan’ is for Claudio to marry Hero, but there is ‘much
ado’ about Hero’s supposed infidelity, that leads to Claudio publicly
humiliating Hero on their wedding day, calling off the marriage, destroying
Hero’s relationship with her father, blackening her name, and forcing her family
to pretend she is dead in order to provoke sympathy and remorse from Claudio.
Yet, as Georg Brandes observes, “Hero is innocent, the accusation slander, she
is not really dead, the sorrow for her loss is groundless, and Claudio marries
her as planned.” (Brown, 1979:). So, it can be argued that, in a sense, in
Shakespeare’s great work Much Ado About
Nothing, nothing happened - because what was supposed to happen,
happened anyway! Such ado about nothing…

Bibliography

·Brown, J.R. 1979. Much Ado About Nothing and As you Like it: A Casebook. Macmillan. London.